The Joint Dissemination Review Panel (JDRP) examines educational interventions and determines their effectiveness. This study's purpose was to assess this review process and identify common characteristics of submittals and ways in which approvals and rejections differed. A locally-developed instrument which collected data on the intervention's effectiveness was administered to 96 submittals reviewed during 1978 and 1979. Results indicated that submittals contained measurable objectives, evaluation designs, and specified sample sizes. Using tests of significance, approved submittals significantly differed from rejections in that they used multiple testing measures; results were statistically significant; information was provided on salient features; and the narrative and tables were clearly presented. Discriminant analysis demonstrated that approvals reported using quasi-experimental designs, multiple test procedures, more information on key features, clearer tables, and control of selection and regression effects. One variable, statistically significant test results, was inversely related. Based on these findings, JDRP submittals should include measurable objectives, quasi- or experimental designs, multiple testing measures, reliable and valid tests, statistically significant test results, a clearly described intervention, and replication information. (Author)